Open SorteKanin opened 1 year ago
Can be implemented together with https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/2702
Its complicated to define all the possibilities, but it might be something like this:
Additionally title and body cannot both be empty
Title is always required, it'd be just body and link. The default is that they're both optional, so I think they'd need 3 options (stored on the community table)
There's also the case for link, that some communities might not want image posts, so that'd need a image posts not allowed
setting.
Title is optional via federation, see #2702.
Speaking of federation, I'm curious how this feature would work with a federated service that maybe doesn't respect the setting. I guess it's kinda the same as the postingRestrictedToMods
setting, which for instance Mastodon and many others have no idea about AFAIK.
Essentially those posts would be ignored/rejected by Lemmy.
Requirements
Is your proposal related to a problem?
Currently it is not possible to disallow using the text field or URL field in specific communities. A lot of subreddits on Reddit use this feature.
My use case is a news community. I would like to disallow the usage of the "Body" field to ensure a more neutral starting point of discussions about the linked news. The OP already has plenty of influence on the discussion from merely choosing the link to post and from what media the news is from (if multiple medias have stories on the news). So I feel requiring the OP to use comments (where the OP will be on a more "equal footing" in the discussion) rather than the body field is appropriate.
Currently, I have a rule in the community like "Don't use the body field. If you want to add something, write a comment instead.". It would be nice if I could enforce this rule somehow as users frequently miss this rule.
Describe the solution you'd like.
Add community settings to disallow usage of the body field. Similarly one could imagine a setting to disallow using the URL field, for example in a conversation-only community.
Describe alternatives you've considered.
The rule I already have is an alternative, but it's not a very good one.
Additional context
No response